![]() |
|
Quality Images and Videos Post your own images and videos of your own days |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Elite Elitist
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 322
|
If I am probably going to travel to a specific location only once (or very rarely), I'd go with the 28-300 to cover all bases. If you're sticking with shots within the city, you would probably be safe with the 60 or 18-70.
__________________
Every oak tree started out as a couple of nuts who stood their ground. - Anonymous http://informationthreshold.blogspot.com, http://spiritualthreshold.blogspot.com |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
This is a fully functional babe lair
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Akron, OH
Posts: 2,324
|
18-70 hands down. The difference on the wide end is dramatic between 26 and 18. I used to have a Nikkor 24-120 which was a great walk around lens, but I ended up always swapping it out for the kit 18-55 lens for wide shots because it made that much of a difference. You can always crop and enlarge to zero in on more distant objects, but you can't make up for that lost wide-angle.
__________________
Kiss my white Irish ass. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
™
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 27,717
|
You mentioned "we" are going to SF. How's your traveling companion with you taking lots of pictures? Do they stand there impatiently while you spend several minutes moving around looking for a good composition with the prime lens? Or are they patient and supportive of your hobby?
If it's the former, then having a zoom lens can be handy. Just shoot and go. Keeps everyone happy and you have a better trip. The 18-70 is probably the best range. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
The future is unwritten
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
|
Don't forget to wear some flowers in your hair.
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|